This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Schmidt, W. H. Articles by Prawat, R. S. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Notes: What Does the Third International Mathematics and Science Study Tell Us About Where to Draw the Line in the Top-Down Versus Bottom-Up Debate?

Michigan State University

Many educational policymakers in this country favor a hybrid top-down, bottom-up approach to reform, arguing that it provides for the best of both worlds—that is, guidance and accountability at the state level combined with ample room to move at the local level. There is considerable uncertainty about how best to implement such an approach, however. Should states, districts, schools, or teachers be responsible for decisions about grade-level content? If so, in what form? This study uses data gathered as part of the Third International Mathematics and Science Study to shed light on these issues. Examining how a range of decisions is made worldwide, from those relating to overall systems goals to specific pedagogical practices in the classroom, should help ground the debate about educational governance in this country.

Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Vol. 21, No. 1, 85-91 (1999)
DOI: 10.3102/01623737021001085


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?